Bulls Waive Byars

Lanky Gunner · Post #1 » by **Lanky Gunner** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:12 pm

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/byars_091026.html

Lame.

stillalive · Post #2 » by **stillalive** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:13 pm

LIES ALL LIES!!!

Post #3 » by **DuckIII** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:15 pm

Aw, schucks. Couldn't they have at least let him suit up for one real NBA game?

RyGuy24 · Post #4 » by **RyGuy24** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:15 pm

Well then.

PippenAintEasy · Post #5 » by **PippenAintEasy** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:17 pm

Yeah, I just got the Bulls text message. BUT ROSE IS GOOD TO GO TOMORROW!

sdhoops · Post #6 » by **sdhoops** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:20 pm

Well wtf was the point of even putting him on the roster if we were just going to waive him a day later?

Grand Champ · Post #7 » by **Grand Champ** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:21 pm

Well the Byars era was good while it lasted! Undefeated during his tenure!

Magilla_Gorilla · Post #8 » by **Magilla_Gorilla** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:21 pm

WTF?

So how many do we have on the roster now?

Derrick R
J Pargo (injured)
K Hinrich
L Hunter (infirm)
J Salmons
Luol D
Tyrus
Taj G
James Johnson
J Noah
B Miller
Jerome James (obese)
A Gray (injured)

We have 13 - 4 of whom who can't or shouldn't play. We've got 9 live bodies?

anorexorcism · Post #9 » by **anorexorcism** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:25 pm

Told ya.

Post #10 » by **dougthonus** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:25 pm

I don't think he's waived.

I think this was a press release set up in case they waived him. It must have been a close call.

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago ... byars.html

Post #11 » by **dougthonus** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:26 pm

Edit, ignore that, I just got the official email. They waived Byars.

BuffaloBull · Post #12 » by **BuffaloBull** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:26 pm

Well, everybody who wants Vinny to go with a short rotation should be happy. The front office is making it so he doesn't have much of a choice.

The 12-man rotation dream will just have to find another home...

stillalive · Post #13 » by **stillalive** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:27 pm

dougthonus wrote:I don't think he's waived.

I think this was a press release set up in case they waived him. It must have been a close call.

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago ... byars.html

EDIT: Doug you deceived me :lol:

anorexorcism · Post #14 » by **anorexorcism** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:29 pm

Can we get a Derrick Byars appreciation thread? In it we can talk about how players' salaries determine their PT (Pargo) and whether they start on this team (Deng). Instead of this guy who would have been decent, we are going to be stuck with Pargo. I know everyone's looking forward to that.

Initially I was not on the Byars bandwagon but after realizing the alternative (Pargo) this pisses me off.

Maybe if I would have supported him more. Damn!

Post #15 » by **dougthonus** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:29 pm

stillalive wrote:
dougthonus wrote:I don't think he's waived.

I think this was a press release set up in case they waived him. It must have been a close call.

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago ... byars.html

Doug please let this be true. Not our golden boy. He shall lead the way to victory!

Sorry, it's true.

I just got the official press release email saying he was waived. They must not have updated the date on the article at that point and had it ready to go for earlier.

I updated my article accordingly.

sonny · Post #16 » by **sonny** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:31 pm

jax98 · Post #17 » by **jax98** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:34 pm

So let me get this straight.

We sign 39-year old Lindsey Hunter to a fully guarenteed contract, and we waive a promosing 25-year old swingman who adds depth to a position of need, despite he'd earn the absolute minimum?

Weak. So weak.

Post #18 » by **Ben** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:34 pm

sonny wrote:

Awesome.

I'm very surprised and quite a bit pissed. Especially with Pargo a little gimpy. I'd like to know exactly what the logic was? What stood to be gained by waiving him, except that little bit of salary?

Post #19 » by **dougthonus** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:38 pm

Morten Jensen wrote:So let me get this straight.

We sign 39-year old Lindsey Hunter to a fully guarenteed contract, and we waive a promosing 25-year old swingman who adds depth to a position of need, despite he'd earn the absolute minimum?

Weak. So weak.

I think if they had it to do over again they wouldn't pay Hunter, but they probably didn't think anyone was going to be worthy of keeping in camp, and they probably had to guarantee Hunter in order to make him not just retire.

kyrv · Post #20 » by **kyrv** » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:39 pm

Was he just temporary insurance for Rose's injury?